Doormats Unite: Confronting the Big Liar in Your Life

Listening yesterday to the Blade Runner, Oscar Pistorius, disclose in a pitiful voice what happened the night he killed his girlfriend turned my stomach. Is anyone really expected to believe that he shot her through the bathroom door thinking she was an intruder? This conclusion is especially difficult in light of a highly plausible alternative explanation: She had wanted to dump him, and he was pissed!

Now don't get me wrong. If I were a juror I would weigh the evidence and make my guilty-or-innocent verdict hinge on whether the case was made beyond a reasonable doubt. I say this even if I actually did end up concluding that he was probably guilty.

Sometimes our own loved ones tell us whoppers that are almost as big as the lies out of Pistorius's mouth. But you do not have an obligation to suspend disbelief and put your brain on a shelf. You can use the implausibility of their claims to conclude to that they are lying.

Imagine, for instance, that a wife comes home late one night, and her husband discovers two days later that she had used her credit card to pay for a few hours at a hotel -- with an added charge for champagne ordered through room service. This alarms him because he had previously seen some sexy texts to his wife from a handsome co-worker. When he musters the courage to confront his wife, she responds, "I just needed some time by myself to unwind...And anyhow, you can't prove anything!"

Well, your life is not a courtroom, and you are not required to offer proof for your reasonable conclusions. Let us not forget that the truth, as opposed to only those events which can be proven, does matter! It is particularly ridiculous to require100% proof to take action! In the example I just gave, the husband can use the implausibility of his wife's claims to decide what is very likely to be true: She is banging another guy!

Acknowledgement:

This post stems from Anita Kelly’s Science of Honesty project, which was made possible through the support of a grant from the John Templeton Foundation. The opinions expressed in this post are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the John Templeton Foundation.

I am South African, male, and have been watching the live coverage of the Pistorius trial for a lot of the time. I can well understand that this could be a crime of passion. On the other hand, I have not heard anything in the testimony so far to suggest that might be the case. So, as you are a Professor of Psychology, I am very interested in just what it is that makes you think that he knew it was Riva that was in the toilet and he deliberately killed her. Just why do you think that is the case? Your post here on your PT blog really doesn't explain it. I think he knew as well but I can't say why, other than gut feel.

I agree- it would be ridiculous to think that we need complete evidence to draw any conclusions about when people are lying or telling the truth in personal interactions. There are certainly times when you just know, based on what is normal behavior or simply based on a gut feeling. However, the court system can't operate that way, so we must deal the challenges and frustrations of requiring extensive evidence to make judgements.

I completely agree with this stance on lying. Too often we allow liars to use the excuse that "you don't have proof!" However, we are kidding ourselves if we are to abide by this rule. No one needs 100% proof of a lie to take action. It is difficult and sometimes impossible to obtain certain proof of lies such as cheating partners. We must take the improbable into account when deciding whether to take action.

It is important to remember, however, that there are flukes. Without 100% proof, you must accept that there is a possibility, no matter how small, that you could be wrong. I think we should TRY to look for proof in these situations, as it can only help the honest person's case. It is also important to look at other factors, such as circumstance and previous experience or behaviors. Does your significant other always come home late without any concrete explanation? Do they take sudden trips without telling you where they're going? Do they become enraged or panicked when they think you may have looked at their phone? If this is the case, then it is likely that an undisclosed hotel charge with champagne is an instance of cheating. But if the accused liar is instead your 65 year old wife with whom you have ten children who goes to church every day and has never even looked at another man in front of you, then it is much more likely that indeed, she needed a few hours to herself to unwind!

I like that you pointed out how you don't need concrete proof to make reasonable conclusions. Too often we go against our gut feeling when someone points out we don't have definitive proof of something that any reasonable person would believe to be true. I think it is important for us to go with what our gut instinct is telling us- we know ourselves, in relationships we know the person the feeling is about, and we need to trust what we are feeling is true. If you're high on the honesty/humility scale you wouldn't believe your wife was cheating on you if she had never given a reason for you to believe so. But if her behavior has led to you feeling a certain way, it is probably for a reason. This does leave room for error though and the possibility that we are wrong, but more often than not, instincts are right.

I agree that people do not need 100% proof to determine whether someone is lying. I think everyone knows what it feels like to be lied to. Lying is such a nasty and deceitful behavior that can often be caught with just a feeling. However, I do not think that we can say that this is true for all situations. It would be difficult if we lived in a world where everyone jumps to conclusions and holds to snap judgments. Though I agree that evidence does not always need to be given when calling out a liar, it is also important to be sure that your assumption is mostly supported and sound.

It seems to me that if someone uses the defense, "you can't prove anything!", it conveys an overall lack of respect in addition to increasing the probability that they are not telling the truth. If the "doormats" in reference are people who are high on the agreeableness scale, then these people should also be the ones who refuse to stay silent about major ethical issues, which seems like it could be contradictory to this article. However, perhaps the people high on agreeableness are willing to tolerate personal abuse, but would stand up to an injustice being done to someone else. If that is the case, it is certainly true that "doormats" who are high in agreeableness, and tend to avoid conflict, need to stand up to any injustice being done to them as if they were witnessing it happening to another person.

I agree with the notion that you shouldn’t need definitive proof to take action in response to a situation like the one you described. That said, I’m not sure if you should break up with or divorce this person based on one isolated incident. If your significant other can give a good explanation for this behavior that seems innocuous and plausible, I think giving the person a chance to change his/her behavior is a fine thing to do. But saying something like “you can’t prove anything,” shows a complete lack of respect for you, and pretty much insinuates that he/she is, in fact, being unfaithful. Personally, I wouldn’t even be able to stand the possibility that my girlfriend/spouse was cheating on me. Even a situation less blatant than the one you described would bother me incessantly, so much so that I’d really need to reconsider the viability of the relationship.

I think that another way in which the scenario of the wife and the hotel room differs from the Pistorius case is that I'm not sure it necessarily matters so much whether or not the wife was actually guilty of cheating. Others have pointed out that in order to evaluate whether or not she was likely cheating, we need more details about the situation. Is she otherwise stable, loving, and open? Or is she more secretive, inconsistent, and hostile when questioned? If the latter is true, it is indeed probable that she cheated on you. And even if that's not the case and she really did need some time to herself, I would argue that it doesn't matter. If you find her other actions and traits to be so untrustworthy, your relationship probably isn't in a great place regardless of her potential infidelity.

I agree that it would be ridiculous to demand 100% proof of a lie to take action against the liar. Everyone hates being lied to; it makes you feel unimportant and stupid in the eyes of the other person. We should be able to speak out about that. But in the case of the husband who saw his wife's credit card charges, what do you suggest is his next step? I assume you mean he should continue to talk to his wife about this before he jumps to drastic measures like filing for divorce. I don't know anyone who would take "You can't prove it" as a reason to drop an issue entirely. Most people would become more suspicious when they heard that. I think that when you believe someone is lying, it is important to confront them head-on by calling them out for the lie and demanding an explanation. Uncovering the truth is vital to know how to move forward from a lie.

I do not think it is necessarily appropriate to draw such concrete conclusions on scant evidence, especially from the most important person in one's life. If your wife is generally a trustworthy and communicative person, it is improper and insulting to accuse her of something otherwise. I think that one should only take action if this event happens more than one time, at the risk of accidentally ruining the trust built in a marriage.

I sort of agree. I think its true that you shouldn't need 100% proof to draw certain conclusions, but also I feel as though if its coming from someone like a wife or husband you should be more inclined to trust them. I think that constantly reading them to see if they're lying could create a very cold and jealous climate between the two of you.

Also the response of the wife in your example, "well you can't prove it anyway!" seems more suspicious than her actually just needing a few hours to herself. I can't imagine being told that and then just being like, "ok I was wrong sorry". That response would make me want to investigate more.

*Nice post. I learn something more challenging on different blogs everyday. It will always be stimulating to read content material from other writers and practice a little something from their store. I’d prefer to use some with the content material on my blog whether you don’t mind. Natually I’ll give you a link on your web blog. Thanks for sharing.